Re: [malware-list] [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to alinuxinterfaceforon access scanning

david
2008-08-15T05:38:51Z

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, david@lang.hm wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, david@lang.hm wrote:
>
>> again, libmalware.so is not referring to any specific body of code, it's
>> referring to the concept that the handling of open/mmap/read/etc and
>> scanning is done via a userspace library rather then by the kernel. if
>> everyone can agree on that concept then hashing out the details of _which_
>> library it gets put in is a smaller detail.
>
> one reason to layer scanners is that you could have one that just checks to
> see if the file was deployed from a OS package, if it was (and still has the
> same hash as the package manager thinks it should have) it sets a flag that
> other scanners could look for (if they see it they can skip scanning the
> file)

actually, instead of trying to have one scanner trust the results of
another, a better approach would be for libmalware to look for the package
manager approval and if it finds that it could skip asking the other
scanners to look at it.

this sort of thing can easily be done in userspace libraries, but you
definantly would _not_ want to do in a kernel-level enforcement mechanism.

David Lang